How should they Pretend?

[Johnfromokc]

Coinkydink?

 

[Alien Allen]

those cartoons are so soothing to ya

how about a link that is not from a biased website

anybody can post crap like that and make it look real

How about revenue comparisons? Or is that too inconvenient for the left who ignores the facts there were a shit load of write offs that were eliminated when the rates were lowered.

You live in a fantasy land

Consider the ploy by the reps that is ongoing. They are all for increased revenue. As long as it looks like there is no tax increase

We have a spending problem and not a revenue problem.

 

[The Man]

increase

We have a spending problem and not a revenue problem.

Totally agree.
IF they started spending less..I might go for a slight tax increase to wipe out the debt.
I just dont see why the govt needs more money every year ...the last 10 years have been dramatic.

Here is what gets me...the liberals were screaming Bush raked up most of the debt...Ok I will give em that.
Now they want to approve doing more of the same....and raise taxes as well.



There is no reason the govt cant reverse some of what has happened in the last 10 years and clean up govt waste.

 

[The Man]

Coinkydink?

John do you really believe that people in 1945 ACTUALLY paid a 94 percent tax?
You do understand that by such a large tax...this would reduces ones net to much less than those of the lower tax brackets?
Thus you would be better off burning your house etc,,,downing sizing a company just to make less so you would have more net than larger earners.

 

[Accountable]

That's not even relevant, TM. He pulled two recessions out of over a dozen. Anybody can cherrypick and pretend it means something. Hell, I'll bet you can dig up two posts of John's that make him look reasonable & intelligent ... so long as you don't show anything but those two.

 

[The Man]

Here is a chart of govt revenues..for the one who support increased spending and taxes....note the sharp rise...giving new meaning to the word cliff.

 

[The Man]

Note above that revenues did not drop Under bush..ending the myth of tax reductions causing the issue...it was spending...not tax cuts..he was gaining revenues for much of his term until the fall

Cuts were proper as there was to much revenue gain....the problem was spending

 

[Catavenger]

BATFE, CIA, DCAS, DEA, and on and on it goes http://www.usa.gov/directory/federal/index.shtml surely something in this alphabet soup of agencies can be trimmed?

 

[The Man]

BATFE, CIA, DCAS, DEA, and on and on it goes http://www.usa.gov/directory/federal/index.shtml surely something in this alphabet soup of agencies can be trimmed?

For sure.

 

[Accountable]

Let's start with the vowels.

 

[Minor Axis]

I absolutely want the gov't to do it. They have their income. They need to budget within it instead of trying to demand the income stretch to match what they want to spend. You act so stupid sometimes just to make a cute quip. It results in you looking more stupid than cute.

Pundits such as yourself sound stupid when all you can spout is that there is a spending problem. It shows a one sided, prejudicial, anti-government, agenda driven attitude not based in neutrality of the issue. And I'm sure you are proud if anyone labels you anti-government.

Note above that revenues did not drop Under bush..ending the myth of tax reductions causing the issue...it was spending...not tax cuts..he was gaining revenues for much of his term until the fall

Cuts were proper as there was to much revenue gain....the problem was spending

You too? At least you guys are consistent on the same propaganda points.

Coinkydink?

All this shows is that the conservatives in this forum along with conservatives in general who bitch about high taxes don't have a "real" basis for their bull shit. Bull shit is their basis.

 

[Alien Allen]

Pundits such as yourself sound stupid when all you can spout is that there is a spending problem. It shows a one sided, prejudicial, anti-government, agenda driven attitude not based in neutrality of the issue. And I'm sure you are proud if anyone labels you anti-government.



You too? At least you guys are consistent on the same propaganda points.

spoken just like Jack Nicholson in a FEW GOOD MEN

"Truth, you can't handle the truth"

 

[Minor Axis]

spoken just like Jack Nicholson in a FEW GOOD MEN

"Truth, you can't handle the truth"

Spoken like Tom Cruise, "Truth, stop fabricating the truth, you're going to jail, you son of a bitch!"
You'll notice that the character who Allen references, was lying is ass off for the entire movie. How appropriate!

 

[Stone]

Spoken like Tom Cruise, "Truth, stop fabricating the truth, you're going to jail, you son of a bitch!"
You'll notice that the character who Allen references, was lying is ass off for the entire movie. How appropriate!

You'll notice that the character who Allen references, was lying is ass off ......

The way I read it....he pinned that on you.

 

[The Man]

You too? At least you guys are consistent on the same propaganda points.



.

No propaganda
Show me where we have a revenue problem

http://www.offtopicz.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=14400&d=1354765062

Its is clearly obvious revenues keep going up except for an occasional bump.

So let me ask this........How much revenue do we need...how much is enough?

 

[Alien Allen]

The way I read it....he pinned that on you.

yup

but he won't notice with the blinders on

 

[The Man]

As of current Total govt spending Fed state and local is $50378 per household...that is 50 grand per household.
Yes they supply the roads etc...but the amount is rather high.
Especially when you consider the average household earnings...the govt through its repetitive tax system{its hand out there during any transaction.}
Gains plenty of revenues.....forget tax brackets and percentages for a moment...everybody is getting fucked regardless of how much you make.
Bottom line...does the govt supply 50 grand worth of a families needs via protections and services,parks,aid roads etc.

 

[Francis]

As of current Total govt spending Fed state and local is $50378 per household...that is 50 grand per household.
Yes they supply the roads etc...but the amount is rather high.
Especially when you consider the average household earnings...the govt through its repetitive tax system{its hand out there during any transaction.}
Gains plenty of revenues.....forget tax brackets and percentages for a moment...everybody is getting fucked regardless of how much you make.
Bottom line...does the govt supply 50 grand worth of a families needs via protections and services,parks,aid roads etc.

Where do these numbers come from TM ?

Just curious because number can be great looking but deceiving as well..

The Economist Intelligence Unit lists Canada’s government debt per person at about US$39,883 or 81.6% of GDP. This compares with the U.S. at $37,953 or 76.3%. Go figure! That said, Greece’s public debt is currently $35,874 or 141.0% and Japan is at $87,601 or 204.9%.

http://business.financialpost.com/2012/06/30/snapshot-of-canadians-finances/

 

[The Man]

the total households in the us was a little over 120 million
And the total spend for fed state and local was 6.1 trillion for 2011
That is just spending....the current dept per household is much higher

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/total_spending_2011USrn

Also your figures are related to per person while mine are per household..with the average household containing more than 1 person

Also look at this trend

1951 - Federal spending at 14.4 percent GDP.

1981 - Federal debt at 32 percent GDP.

1982 - Federal spending at 23 percent GDP.

1995 - Federal debt at 66 percent GDP.

2000 - Federal spending at 18 percent GDP.

2009 - Federal spending at 24 percent GDP.

2011 - Federal debt at 97 percent GDP.


Not good

 

[Francis]

the total households in the us was a little over 120 million
And the total spend for fed state and local was 6.1 trillion for 2011
That is just spending....the current dept per household is much higher

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/total_spending_2011USrn

Also your figures are related to per person while mine are per household..with the average household containing more than 1 person

Also look at this trend

1951 - Federal spending at 14.4 percent GDP.

1981 - Federal debt at 32 percent GDP.

1982 - Federal spending at 23 percent GDP.

1995 - Federal debt at 66 percent GDP.

2000 - Federal spending at 18 percent GDP.

2009 - Federal spending at 24 percent GDP.

2011 - Federal debt at 97 percent GDP.


Not good

From your own link if you look at the sub link they give it gives you a much better understanding of the total debt..

1941 US debt per GDP was at 122%.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_national_debt

Also your figures are related to per person while mine are per household..with the average household containing more than 1 person

In your link I could not find how the definition of a household ( how many people and what ages ? ).. This can skew the numbers greatly.. ( so link please as I am working and can't keep searching )..

Many could have incomes that do not get reported such as those who work illegally, under the table and I'm not sure in the US but if your on disability in Canada or on Workman's Compensation its not taxable.

That being said these people still pay municipal taxes, state taxes and other taxes that everyday life brings upon us one way or another. If they rent a place and the landlord pays it and when they buy stuff they pay the goods taxes. I'm I correct, Yes or No ?